“We have been searching for a suitable site in the county for over 15 years and today our dream has become a reality.”

The centre is set to care for 1,000 rescue dogs every year, adding to the 17,000 already looked after at the existing 19 Dogs Trust homes across the country.

Maria Wickes, manager of the newEssex rescue centre, added: “We have been overwhelmed by the support we have received from local people both in wanting to work for the charity, donating items, volunteering, raising funds and adopting rescue dogs. So, thank you everyone for your support.

“We hope to be able to care for a thousand dogs a year at Dogs Trust Essex, so the future is looking brighter for dogs in the region.”

The 14-acre site also includes exercise paddocks on both astroturf and sand.

Forty-one members of staff have been hired to take on a range of roles.

The official opening, attended by Mayor Mo Larkin and children from North Crescent Primary School, in Wickford, kicked off with a parade of rescue dogs.

Promoted Stories

Comments (64)

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?CarnMountification

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Score: -9

Chris Flunk says...3:07pm Tue 3 Jun 14

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.Chris Flunk

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

Score: -6

w-jback says...3:11pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.w-jback

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

Score: -27

Chris Flunk says...3:22pm Tue 3 Jun 14

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

I think you'll find that the dogs trust is a charity and people chose to contribute to it. So, do you think people's choice of charitable contributions should be restricted to what you deem worthy? If you are going to use this argument, surely it's disgusting to spend money on shelter for the homeless in a world where there are starving children or people dying of controllable or treatable diseases. Just because something isn't top of your personal worthiness chart doesn't make it wrong. There's room to address more than one issue at a time.

[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that the dogs trust is a charity and people chose to contribute to it. So, do you think people's choice of charitable contributions should be restricted to what you deem worthy?
If you are going to use this argument, surely it's disgusting to spend money on shelter for the homeless in a world where there are starving children or people dying of controllable or treatable diseases. Just because something isn't top of your personal worthiness chart doesn't make it wrong. There's room to address more than one issue at a time.Chris Flunk

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

I think you'll find that the dogs trust is a charity and people chose to contribute to it. So, do you think people's choice of charitable contributions should be restricted to what you deem worthy? If you are going to use this argument, surely it's disgusting to spend money on shelter for the homeless in a world where there are starving children or people dying of controllable or treatable diseases. Just because something isn't top of your personal worthiness chart doesn't make it wrong. There's room to address more than one issue at a time.

Score: 52

I care about rayleigh says...3:24pm Tue 3 Jun 14

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

The Dogs Trust is a charity to which lots of people donate money - they must think it's worthwhile to look after unwanted pets. If you want to discourage people from owning dogs, then bring back the licence fee.

[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]The Dogs Trust is a charity to which lots of people donate money - they must think it's worthwhile to look after unwanted pets. If you want to discourage people from owning dogs, then bring back the licence fee.I care about rayleigh

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

The Dogs Trust is a charity to which lots of people donate money - they must think it's worthwhile to look after unwanted pets. If you want to discourage people from owning dogs, then bring back the licence fee.

Score: 30

Maddogg says...4:09pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Rather trust a dog than a human.Maddogg

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Score: 54

Howard Cháse says...4:42pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.Howard Cháse

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.

Score: 33

CarnMountification says...4:52pm Tue 3 Jun 14

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]Yes, why build plush homes for sh1tting barking animals, and let our fellow man to live in utter squalorCarnMountification

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

Most people are quite capable of helping themselves, dogs sadly aren't! animal lovers donated to have this built & good for them, if you don't like it tough!

Most people are quite capable of helping themselves, dogs sadly aren't! animal lovers donated to have this built & good for them, if you don't like it tough!black jack ketchum

Most people are quite capable of helping themselves, dogs sadly aren't! animal lovers donated to have this built & good for them, if you don't like it tough!

Score: 49

Diddy25 says...6:12pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Brilliant! Have been waiting for you to open. Am hoping you run similar to Battersea?? As soon as my hols are over, I'll be there looking for my next (5th rescue) doggy. Can't wait.

Brilliant! Have been waiting for you to open. Am hoping you run similar to Battersea?? As soon as my hols are over, I'll be there looking for my next (5th rescue) doggy. Can't wait.Diddy25

Brilliant! Have been waiting for you to open. Am hoping you run similar to Battersea?? As soon as my hols are over, I'll be there looking for my next (5th rescue) doggy. Can't wait.

Score: 29

ThisYear says...6:20pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?ThisYear

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Score: -36

Chris Flunk says...6:35pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.Chris Flunk

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

Score: 30

ThisYear says...6:45pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"ThisYear

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Score: -17

Howard Cháse says...7:11pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.Howard Cháse

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

Score: 11

ThisYear says...7:28pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...
I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..
Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'ThisYear

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

Score: -24

Howard Cháse says...7:30pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...
I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..
Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford.
Haven't stopped laughing yet here.Howard Cháse

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here.

Score: 12

ThisYear says...7:35pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here.

No council of the year award, No MP status, No OBE etc, No council leadership, No council seat, No significant number voting for him, No more pie and gravy. BUT he still has his massive head! Where on earth (if thats the planet) does he buy his hats?

[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...
I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..
Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford.
Haven't stopped laughing yet here.[/p][/quote]No council of the year award, No MP status, No OBE etc, No council leadership, No council seat, No significant number voting for him, No more pie and gravy.
BUT he still has his massive head!
Where on earth (if thats the planet) does he buy his hats?ThisYear

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here.

No council of the year award, No MP status, No OBE etc, No council leadership, No council seat, No significant number voting for him, No more pie and gravy. BUT he still has his massive head! Where on earth (if thats the planet) does he buy his hats?

Score: -4

Devils Advocate says...9:04pm Tue 3 Jun 14

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?Devils Advocate

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

Score: 11

Chris Flunk says...12:53am Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer:
Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.Chris Flunk

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

Score: 16

Bangemup says...5:51am Wed 4 Jun 14

Maddogg wrote…

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Just for the record I have been bitten by both !

[quote][p][bold]Maddogg[/bold] wrote:
Rather trust a dog than a human.[/p][/quote]Just for the record I have been bitten by both !Bangemup

Maddogg wrote…

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Just for the record I have been bitten by both !

Score: 5

Bangemup says...5:51am Wed 4 Jun 14

Maddogg wrote…

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Just for the record I have been bitten by both !

[quote][p][bold]Maddogg[/bold] wrote:
Rather trust a dog than a human.[/p][/quote]Just for the record I have been bitten by both !Bangemup

Maddogg wrote…

Rather trust a dog than a human.

Just for the record I have been bitten by both !

Score: 3

blackheart says...9:20am Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?blackheart

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Score: 19

Kim Gandy says...5:05pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus.
Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.Kim Gandy

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.

Score: 8

Kim Gandy says...5:07pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...
I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..
Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]you have to bring travellers into everything don't you?
Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now.
You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name.
You are again in a minority.
Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered.
Otherwise pipe down.Kim Gandy

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down.

Score: 9

pussycats says...5:13pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)pussycats

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Score: 1

Kim Gandy says...5:19pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Devils Advocate wrote…

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

you still at it? Do you know this person? Has she actually had any money from the public purse for her own ends? Has she got herself a Baroness title despite being a Socialist and does she collect £300 a day for attending the House of Lords? No? But we know someone who has don't we? Or do you? Does she have a chauffeur driven limo paid for by you? Does she enjoy meals at your expense? Were her portrait and chain paid for by you? Has she done you any harm? Oh and she didn't open it actually. She attended it by INVITATION. As she does many events. She does in fact spend a lot of her own money on prizes and events and raises millions for charity. Do you? Much of what she does goes unreported but as soon as the twerps in the Labour group start stirring up a hate campaign, idiots listen to their caterwauling. Only very stupid people believe anything at all that comes out of the mouths of the bad losers and sour grapes of the Labour group. Truth is, those who do most of the stirring are not exactly squeaky clean themselves. Try looking at other politicians, particularly Labour. Look under the FoI, something "Cllr" Gavin Callaghan is fond of... although usually a waste of time and public money because he looks under all the wrong stones. The biggest waste of space and public money in Basildon is what he sees when he looks in a mirror. Just loves victimising folk. But it's water off a duck's back to me. I couldn't care less. Just strengthens my resolve. Thing is now Labour has been ground into the dirt by the voting public of Basildon they are going to get nastier and start stirring up more trouble for their opponents. Watch this space. Thing is, they are now history and need to accept it and move on. Check out their election campaign and the methods they used to get people to vote (obviously a MASSIVE failure). In short, if you want a politician to pick on, there is no shortage, especially the hypocrites of the Labour group who delight in highlighting others' supposed shortcomings whilst concealing their own. If you want to know what they do, there are all sorts of correct channels to find out. But if you listen to the media and particularly ANYTHING that issues forth from the rabid cake hole of Callaghan, you might as well flush the toilet and listen to that for all the common sense you'll get.

[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote:
See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?[/p][/quote]you still at it?
Do you know this person? Has she actually had any money from the public purse for her own ends? Has she got herself a Baroness title despite being a Socialist and does she collect £300 a day for attending the House of Lords? No? But we know someone who has don't we? Or do you?
Does she have a chauffeur driven limo paid for by you? Does she enjoy meals at your expense? Were her portrait and chain paid for by you?
Has she done you any harm?
Oh and she didn't open it actually. She attended it by INVITATION. As she does many events.
She does in fact spend a lot of her own money on prizes and events and raises millions for charity. Do you?
Much of what she does goes unreported but as soon as the twerps in the Labour group start stirring up a hate campaign, idiots listen to their caterwauling. Only very stupid people believe anything at all that comes out of the mouths of the bad losers and sour grapes of the Labour group.
Truth is, those who do most of the stirring are not exactly squeaky clean themselves.
Try looking at other politicians, particularly Labour. Look under the FoI, something "Cllr" Gavin Callaghan is fond of... although usually a waste of time and public money because he looks under all the wrong stones. The biggest waste of space and public money in Basildon is what he sees when he looks in a mirror.
Just loves victimising folk. But it's water off a duck's back to me. I couldn't care less. Just strengthens my resolve.
Thing is now Labour has been ground into the dirt by the voting public of Basildon they are going to get nastier and start stirring up more trouble for their opponents.
Watch this space.
Thing is, they are now history and need to accept it and move on.
Check out their election campaign and the methods they used to get people to vote (obviously a MASSIVE failure).
In short, if you want a politician to pick on, there is no shortage, especially the hypocrites of the Labour group who delight in highlighting others' supposed shortcomings whilst concealing their own.
If you want to know what they do, there are all sorts of correct channels to find out. But if you listen to the media and particularly ANYTHING that issues forth from the rabid cake hole of Callaghan, you might as well flush the toilet and listen to that for all the common sense you'll get.Kim Gandy

Devils Advocate wrote…

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

you still at it? Do you know this person? Has she actually had any money from the public purse for her own ends? Has she got herself a Baroness title despite being a Socialist and does she collect £300 a day for attending the House of Lords? No? But we know someone who has don't we? Or do you? Does she have a chauffeur driven limo paid for by you? Does she enjoy meals at your expense? Were her portrait and chain paid for by you? Has she done you any harm? Oh and she didn't open it actually. She attended it by INVITATION. As she does many events. She does in fact spend a lot of her own money on prizes and events and raises millions for charity. Do you? Much of what she does goes unreported but as soon as the twerps in the Labour group start stirring up a hate campaign, idiots listen to their caterwauling. Only very stupid people believe anything at all that comes out of the mouths of the bad losers and sour grapes of the Labour group. Truth is, those who do most of the stirring are not exactly squeaky clean themselves. Try looking at other politicians, particularly Labour. Look under the FoI, something "Cllr" Gavin Callaghan is fond of... although usually a waste of time and public money because he looks under all the wrong stones. The biggest waste of space and public money in Basildon is what he sees when he looks in a mirror. Just loves victimising folk. But it's water off a duck's back to me. I couldn't care less. Just strengthens my resolve. Thing is now Labour has been ground into the dirt by the voting public of Basildon they are going to get nastier and start stirring up more trouble for their opponents. Watch this space. Thing is, they are now history and need to accept it and move on. Check out their election campaign and the methods they used to get people to vote (obviously a MASSIVE failure). In short, if you want a politician to pick on, there is no shortage, especially the hypocrites of the Labour group who delight in highlighting others' supposed shortcomings whilst concealing their own. If you want to know what they do, there are all sorts of correct channels to find out. But if you listen to the media and particularly ANYTHING that issues forth from the rabid cake hole of Callaghan, you might as well flush the toilet and listen to that for all the common sense you'll get.

Score: -6

Kim Gandy says...5:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.

[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D
I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.Kim Gandy

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.

Score: 0

LexyGirl says...5:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

I adore all animals but to spend 7 million on this seems very excessive.

I adore all animals but to spend 7 million on this seems very excessive.LexyGirl

I adore all animals but to spend 7 million on this seems very excessive.

Score: 2

LexyGirl says...5:25pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?LexyGirl

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Score: 6

Kim Gandy says...5:28pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Devils Advocate wrote…

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

Oh and no meals were laid on, just nibbles which everyone partook of. If you want to check out free meals for councillors at taxpayers' expense I suggest you go to County Hall and see who has been claiming freebies for years. Smoked salmon, roast pork, claret.. Very interesting. Mo Larkin isn't one of them as she is not a county councillor, nor does she claim freebies at the Bas Centre or anywhere else. She buys her own food when on council duty. Quite often politicians, when attending events, will be offered nibbles but that's about it. And it is usually the organisers, rather than the public, who pay. And generally everyone gets a sandwich or a piece of cake if the organisers have laid it on. Mo Larkin holds charity balls where everyone including her, pays for their own meals. Nobody gets in gratis. Just goes to show, you can't believe everything you read online. If you did you'd be as barmy as the rest. No substitute for actually knowing and experiencing. Have a good old scout around at councillors' expenses. They are published online. Check out Lady Ange of Vange AKA "Baroness" Basildon, (former Basildon MP Angela Smith) and her £300 a day attendance fee at the House of Lords. This coming from a Socialist who didn't believe in hereditary peerages but was quite happy to accept one herself. Now that really is worth looking at if you want to b1tch about politicians whose costs come out of your pocket. Let's get it in perspective eh?

[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote:
See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?[/p][/quote]Oh and no meals were laid on, just nibbles which everyone partook of.
If you want to check out free meals for councillors at taxpayers' expense I suggest you go to County Hall and see who has been claiming freebies for years. Smoked salmon, roast pork, claret..
Very interesting.
Mo Larkin isn't one of them as she is not a county councillor, nor does she claim freebies at the Bas Centre or anywhere else. She buys her own food when on council duty.
Quite often politicians, when attending events, will be offered nibbles but that's about it. And it is usually the organisers, rather than the public, who pay. And generally everyone gets a sandwich or a piece of cake if the organisers have laid it on.
Mo Larkin holds charity balls where everyone including her, pays for their own meals. Nobody gets in gratis.
Just goes to show, you can't believe everything you read online. If you did you'd be as barmy as the rest.
No substitute for actually knowing and experiencing.
Have a good old scout around at councillors' expenses. They are published online.
Check out Lady Ange of Vange AKA "Baroness" Basildon, (former Basildon MP Angela Smith) and her £300 a day attendance fee at the House of Lords. This coming from a Socialist who didn't believe in hereditary peerages but was quite happy to accept one herself.
Now that really is worth looking at if you want to b1tch about politicians whose costs come out of your pocket.
Let's get it in perspective eh?Kim Gandy

Devils Advocate wrote…

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?

Oh and no meals were laid on, just nibbles which everyone partook of. If you want to check out free meals for councillors at taxpayers' expense I suggest you go to County Hall and see who has been claiming freebies for years. Smoked salmon, roast pork, claret.. Very interesting. Mo Larkin isn't one of them as she is not a county councillor, nor does she claim freebies at the Bas Centre or anywhere else. She buys her own food when on council duty. Quite often politicians, when attending events, will be offered nibbles but that's about it. And it is usually the organisers, rather than the public, who pay. And generally everyone gets a sandwich or a piece of cake if the organisers have laid it on. Mo Larkin holds charity balls where everyone including her, pays for their own meals. Nobody gets in gratis. Just goes to show, you can't believe everything you read online. If you did you'd be as barmy as the rest. No substitute for actually knowing and experiencing. Have a good old scout around at councillors' expenses. They are published online. Check out Lady Ange of Vange AKA "Baroness" Basildon, (former Basildon MP Angela Smith) and her £300 a day attendance fee at the House of Lords. This coming from a Socialist who didn't believe in hereditary peerages but was quite happy to accept one herself. Now that really is worth looking at if you want to b1tch about politicians whose costs come out of your pocket. Let's get it in perspective eh?

Score: -2

Kim Gandy says...5:33pm Wed 4 Jun 14

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

[quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.
I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.
So much jealousy.
It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.
Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.
So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?Kim Gandy

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

Score: -1

Abington86 says...5:50pm Wed 4 Jun 14

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?Abington86

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?

Score: 3

LexyGirl says...5:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

My people have been hated on for centuries, I ignore it, that's what you should do :)

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.
I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.
So much jealousy.
It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.
Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.
So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?[/p][/quote]My people have been hated on for centuries, I ignore it, that's what you should do :)LexyGirl

Kim Gandy wrote…

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

My people have been hated on for centuries, I ignore it, that's what you should do :)

Score: -1

Abington86 says...6:18pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic.

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity?
We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him?
Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension.
I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy.
Keep on topic.Abington86

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic.

Score: 4

Devils Advocate says...6:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do!
Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!Devils Advocate

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!

Score: 3

bellabear1 says...7:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

Humans being homeless is normally due to their own doing whereas dogs are made homeless by humans and can't help themselves

[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]Humans being homeless is normally due to their own doing whereas dogs are made homeless by humans and can't help themselvesbellabear1

w-jback wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

CarnMountification wrote…

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?

Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.

No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.

Humans being homeless is normally due to their own doing whereas dogs are made homeless by humans and can't help themselves

Score: 7

ThisYear says...10:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

You decide my question is a rhetorical question...and then continue as if that were a fact...but at least you corrected your mistake. So the answer is Yes..the padding after the answer is irrelevant to the question...as well as being incorrect..seems like you may have to correct yourself again It is not always worth seeking planning permission before etc etc..sometimes it is worth applying retrospectively...as many people and business' do.

[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer:
Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]You decide my question is a rhetorical question...and then continue as if that were a fact...but at least you corrected your mistake.
So the answer is Yes..the padding after the answer is irrelevant to the question...as well as being incorrect..seems like you may have to correct yourself again
It is not always worth seeking planning permission before etc etc..sometimes it is worth applying retrospectively...as many people and business' do.ThisYear

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

You decide my question is a rhetorical question...and then continue as if that were a fact...but at least you corrected your mistake. So the answer is Yes..the padding after the answer is irrelevant to the question...as well as being incorrect..seems like you may have to correct yourself again It is not always worth seeking planning permission before etc etc..sometimes it is worth applying retrospectively...as many people and business' do.

Score: -8

ThisYear says...11:01pm Wed 4 Jun 14

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.
What on earth is a "home creature"
What on earth is a "home dog"
Are you bonging out again?ThisYear

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Score: -7

ThisYear says...11:08pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.

Oh goodness me...the extreme poster accused of being a extreme right winger calling other posters racist! You feel if a question has implication to a culture that is racism? Can you explain how and why? (listen for the slithering off the thread) "And some of it isn't their own land" What on earth are you rambling about? Some of what isn't who's? "There is a legal and an illegal site" There isn't an illegal site...only a legal one, which would suggest it is you talking out of your...hat. Who is the "theirs" you refer to? You really dont have much connection with the real world do you Ga-Ga?

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus.
Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.[/p][/quote]Oh goodness me...the extreme poster accused of being a extreme right winger calling other posters racist!
You feel if a question has implication to a culture that is racism?
Can you explain how and why? (listen for the slithering off the thread)
"And some of it isn't their own land"
What on earth are you rambling about?
Some of what isn't who's?
"There is a legal and an illegal site"
There isn't an illegal site...only a legal one, which would suggest it is you talking out of your...hat.
Who is the "theirs" you refer to?
You really dont have much connection with the real world do you Ga-Ga?ThisYear

Kim Gandy wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.

Oh goodness me...the extreme poster accused of being a extreme right winger calling other posters racist! You feel if a question has implication to a culture that is racism? Can you explain how and why? (listen for the slithering off the thread) "And some of it isn't their own land" What on earth are you rambling about? Some of what isn't who's? "There is a legal and an illegal site" There isn't an illegal site...only a legal one, which would suggest it is you talking out of your...hat. Who is the "theirs" you refer to? You really dont have much connection with the real world do you Ga-Ga?

Score: -8

Kim Gandy says...11:49pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching!

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is...
1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else.
2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture.
3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character.
4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up.
5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is?
6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance.
7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters.
8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me.
9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience.
10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit.
11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have.
12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good.
13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk.
14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse.
15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents.
16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors.
17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this.
18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities.
19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference.
20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it.
21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't.
22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are.
23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club."
(It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".)
Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on.
Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms.
Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me.
You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body..
Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try.
And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out.
Happy researching!Kim Gandy

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching!

Score: -6

ThisYear says...11:51pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down.

How do you make mention of Dale farm without implicating the resident of said Farm? "You are a pointless individual" Oh the irony " and have no right to an opinion" And that sums you and your ideology up entirely doesn't it? " NO KNOWLEDGE" I have more knowledge of the subject matter than you ever would or could have..you being part of a despicable act against little children from the community on question doesn't make you an expert on said community. "and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority" Oh you muppet...here is a sample of your deranged inverted thinking...It is you who is in the minority by using you name..can you comprehend that simple fact? I would rather live beside them on a piece of land that beside you in a flat above a drinking den.

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was:
"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...
I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..
Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]you have to bring travellers into everything don't you?
Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now.
You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name.
You are again in a minority.
Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered.
Otherwise pipe down.[/p][/quote]How do you make mention of Dale farm without implicating the resident of said Farm?
"You are a pointless individual"
Oh the irony
" and have no right to an opinion"
And that sums you and your ideology up entirely doesn't it?
" NO KNOWLEDGE"
I have more knowledge of the subject matter than you ever would or could have..you being part of a despicable act against little children from the community on question doesn't make you an expert on said community.
"and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority"
Oh you muppet...here is a sample of your deranged inverted thinking...It is you who is in the minority by using you name..can you comprehend that simple fact?
I would rather live beside them on a piece of land that beside you in a flat above a drinking den.ThisYear

Kim Gandy wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Howard Cháse wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Chris Flunk wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.

The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"

Yes it is.

So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'

you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down.

How do you make mention of Dale farm without implicating the resident of said Farm? "You are a pointless individual" Oh the irony " and have no right to an opinion" And that sums you and your ideology up entirely doesn't it? " NO KNOWLEDGE" I have more knowledge of the subject matter than you ever would or could have..you being part of a despicable act against little children from the community on question doesn't make you an expert on said community. "and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority" Oh you muppet...here is a sample of your deranged inverted thinking...It is you who is in the minority by using you name..can you comprehend that simple fact? I would rather live beside them on a piece of land that beside you in a flat above a drinking den.

Score: -6

ThisYear says...11:53pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.

"I'm quite sane actually" Oh dear..

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D
I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.[/p][/quote]"I'm quite sane actually"
Oh dear..ThisYear

Kim Gandy wrote…

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.

"I'm quite sane actually" Oh dear..

Score: -4

ThisYear says...11:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

"Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is." Why have so many org's and people from them accused you of what you say they have? It can't be because of jealousy! You are not much of a catch, not particularly pleasant looking, have no money, live above a drinking den, have a character and personality of a sewer rat and those are the things that could be deemed to be in your favour..

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.
I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.
So much jealousy.
It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.
Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.
So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?[/p][/quote]"Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is."
Why have so many org's and people from them accused you of what you say they have?
It can't be because of jealousy!
You are not much of a catch, not particularly pleasant looking, have no money, live above a drinking den, have a character and personality of a sewer rat and those are the things that could be deemed to be in your favour..ThisYear

Kim Gandy wrote…

LexyGirl wrote…

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?

Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?

"Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is." Why have so many org's and people from them accused you of what you say they have? It can't be because of jealousy! You are not much of a catch, not particularly pleasant looking, have no money, live above a drinking den, have a character and personality of a sewer rat and those are the things that could be deemed to be in your favour..

Score: -7

ThisYear says...11:59pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Abington86 wrote…

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?

Question like this she refuses to answer and even claims not to read posts that hold such questions..

[quote][p][bold]Abington86[/bold] wrote:
But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?[/p][/quote]Question like this she refuses to answer and even claims not to read posts that hold such questions..ThisYear

Abington86 wrote…

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?

Question like this she refuses to answer and even claims not to read posts that hold such questions..

Score: -3

ThisYear says...12:02am Thu 5 Jun 14

Abington86 wrote…

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic.

Yet a while back Gandy was slagging ' texting Mo' off as if her sanity depended on it.

[quote][p][bold]Abington86[/bold] wrote:
Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity?
We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him?
Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension.
I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy.
Keep on topic.[/p][/quote]Yet a while back Gandy was slagging ' texting Mo' off as if her sanity depended on it.ThisYear

Abington86 wrote…

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic.

Yet a while back Gandy was slagging ' texting Mo' off as if her sanity depended on it.

Score: -4

ThisYear says...12:05am Thu 5 Jun 14

Devils Advocate wrote…

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!

"As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL " Can you give a link to this? As for liking herself to Boudicca..perhaps she meant her chariot horse

[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote:
Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do!
Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude![/p][/quote]"As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL "
Can you give a link to this?
As for liking herself to Boudicca..perhaps she meant her chariot horseThisYear

Devils Advocate wrote…

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!

"As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL " Can you give a link to this? As for liking herself to Boudicca..perhaps she meant her chariot horse

Score: -4

ThisYear says...12:15am Thu 5 Jun 14

Kim Gandy wrote…

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching!

So you only get to hear about the posts about/directed at you from associates.. Don't those who thumb up this strange woman's comment realise like they are encouraging her problems? "I have worked for national and local newspapers " Why dont they use you now? "You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you" You dont think the same can be said for you? (If you believe in all that bullshinery) The people who fought in the wars did not do so to allow your brand of hate to replace the decency they helped establish in this country...

[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote:
Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is...
1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else.
2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture.
3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character.
4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up.
5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is?
6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance.
7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters.
8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me.
9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience.
10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit.
11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have.
12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good.
13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk.
14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse.
15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents.
16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors.
17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this.
18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities.
19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference.
20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it.
21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't.
22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are.
23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club."
(It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".)
Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on.
Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms.
Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me.
You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body..
Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try.
And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out.
Happy researching![/p][/quote]So you only get to hear about the posts about/directed at you from associates..
Don't those who thumb up this strange woman's comment realise like they are encouraging her problems?
"I have worked for national and local newspapers "
Why dont they use you now?
"You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you"
You dont think the same can be said for you? (If you believe in all that bullshinery)
The people who fought in the wars did not do so to allow your brand of hate to replace the decency they helped establish in this country...ThisYear

Kim Gandy wrote…

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching!

So you only get to hear about the posts about/directed at you from associates.. Don't those who thumb up this strange woman's comment realise like they are encouraging her problems? "I have worked for national and local newspapers " Why dont they use you now? "You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you" You dont think the same can be said for you? (If you believe in all that bullshinery) The people who fought in the wars did not do so to allow your brand of hate to replace the decency they helped establish in this country...

Score: -2

pussycats says...12:52am Thu 5 Jun 14

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!

[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!pussycats

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!

Score: 8

Abington86 says...8:43am Thu 5 Jun 14

Ms Gandy - how many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT,repeat NOT 'Councillor Cockroach.' Why do you I think that I am him. It is no secret that I am not at all aligned with the Labour party in any way so please where is your EVIDENCE that I am a Labour councillor? Just answer the question - where were you a Councillor and why are you no longer a councillor? I think that you stood as Councillor for something called the English Democrats but secured only a handful of votes. Is this true? How many millions has the Mayor Basildon raised for charity Ms Gandy. You have claimed that she has so where are the FACTS to back up this statement?

Ms Gandy - how many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT,repeat NOT 'Councillor Cockroach.'
Why do you I think that I am him. It is no secret that I am not at all aligned with the Labour party in any way so please where is your EVIDENCE that I am a Labour councillor?
Just answer the question - where were you a Councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?
I think that you stood as Councillor for something called the English Democrats but secured only a handful of votes. Is this true?
How many millions has the Mayor Basildon raised for charity Ms Gandy. You have claimed that she has so where are the FACTS to back up this statement?Abington86

Ms Gandy - how many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT,repeat NOT 'Councillor Cockroach.' Why do you I think that I am him. It is no secret that I am not at all aligned with the Labour party in any way so please where is your EVIDENCE that I am a Labour councillor? Just answer the question - where were you a Councillor and why are you no longer a councillor? I think that you stood as Councillor for something called the English Democrats but secured only a handful of votes. Is this true? How many millions has the Mayor Basildon raised for charity Ms Gandy. You have claimed that she has so where are the FACTS to back up this statement?

Score: 4

wonga says...8:48am Thu 5 Jun 14

Mo Larkin opens a dog centre.. How very apt. Expect she has her own kennel there.. with a gold gravy bowl.

Mo Larkin opens a dog centre.. How very apt. Expect she has her own kennel there.. with a gold gravy bowl.wonga

Mo Larkin opens a dog centre.. How very apt. Expect she has her own kennel there.. with a gold gravy bowl.

Score: 3

blackheart says...10:11am Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.
What on earth is a "home creature"
What on earth is a "home dog"
Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.
Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.
You know what a rocket is, yes?blackheart

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

Score: 3

Devils Advocate says...1:28pm Thu 5 Jun 14

pussycats wrote…

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!

Sorry pussycats, I just couldn't resist. But you are right, that's why I always make my original about three editions long. Kim cannot concentrate that long so it does help in some strange way.

[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting![/p][/quote]Sorry pussycats, I just couldn't resist. But you are right, that's why I always make my original about three editions long. Kim cannot concentrate that long so it does help in some strange way.Devils Advocate

pussycats wrote…

pussycats wrote…

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)

Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!

Sorry pussycats, I just couldn't resist. But you are right, that's why I always make my original about three editions long. Kim cannot concentrate that long so it does help in some strange way.

Score: 2

ThisYear says...6:17pm Thu 5 Jun 14

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

I think you could clearly make you posts more understandable (as you have now attempted to do)...most people are not on your rather weird wave length and so wouldn't know what a "home creature" is and rightly so, as such a thing doesn't exist..*note to you; must make waffle clearer. " if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature" But you didn't 'say' that did you? Im sure the readers can see the back tracking you are making to slither out of what you were implying.. Ugly minded dripweed.

[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.
What on earth is a "home creature"
What on earth is a "home dog"
Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.
Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.
You know what a rocket is, yes?[/p][/quote]I think you could clearly make you posts more understandable (as you have now attempted to do)...most people are not on your rather weird wave length and so wouldn't know what a "home creature" is and rightly so, as such a thing doesn't exist..*note to you; must make waffle clearer.
" if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature"
But you didn't 'say' that did you?
Im sure the readers can see the back tracking you are making to slither out of what you were implying..
Ugly minded dripweed.ThisYear

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

I think you could clearly make you posts more understandable (as you have now attempted to do)...most people are not on your rather weird wave length and so wouldn't know what a "home creature" is and rightly so, as such a thing doesn't exist..*note to you; must make waffle clearer. " if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature" But you didn't 'say' that did you? Im sure the readers can see the back tracking you are making to slither out of what you were implying.. Ugly minded dripweed.

Score: -10

ThisYear says...6:20pm Thu 5 Jun 14

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

BTW...I do know what a rocket is BUT lets see if you do, like to explain it to me? (psst readers, lets see if I can get him to waste another half hour of his life sniping, because he cant really do what he wants to do...its illegal you know)

[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.
What on earth is a "home creature"
What on earth is a "home dog"
Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.
Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.
You know what a rocket is, yes?[/p][/quote]BTW...I do know what a rocket is BUT lets see if you do, like to explain it to me?
(psst readers, lets see if I can get him to waste another half hour of his life sniping, because he cant really do what he wants to do...its illegal you know)ThisYear

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

blackheart wrote…

ThisYear wrote…

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?

Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?

Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?

Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?

BTW...I do know what a rocket is BUT lets see if you do, like to explain it to me? (psst readers, lets see if I can get him to waste another half hour of his life sniping, because he cant really do what he wants to do...its illegal you know)

Score: -11

Devils Advocate says...7:04pm Thu 5 Jun 14

This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy.

This year,
This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references.
http://edlnews.co.uk
/index.php/latest-ne
ws/latest-news/425-e
xposed-ukip-candidat
e-and-edl-supporter-
kim-gandy.Devils Advocate

This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy.

Score: -3

ThisYear says...8:00pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Devils Advocate wrote…

This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy.

Opened the link and was shocked! Good lord! The woman is evil to the bone...If she is not busting out of her dress she is busting out with hatred and bile...one picture looks like her face has been superimposed atop a pair of bare buttocks...have a look and see for yourselves.

[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote:
This year,
This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references.
http://edlnews.co.uk
/index.php/latest-ne
ws/latest-news/425-e
xposed-ukip-candidat
e-and-edl-supporter-
kim-gandy.[/p][/quote]Opened the link and was shocked!
Good lord! The woman is evil to the bone...If she is not busting out of her dress she is busting out with hatred and bile...one picture looks like her face has been superimposed atop a pair of bare buttocks...have a look and see for yourselves.ThisYear

Devils Advocate wrote…

This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy.

Opened the link and was shocked! Good lord! The woman is evil to the bone...If she is not busting out of her dress she is busting out with hatred and bile...one picture looks like her face has been superimposed atop a pair of bare buttocks...have a look and see for yourselves.

Score: -2

Ghallo says...9:37am Fri 6 Jun 14

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).Ghallo

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

Score: 7

wonga says...2:32pm Fri 6 Jun 14

It's well over due that the Echo barred Gandy from this site, preferably blocking her IP address. She ruins just about every thread with her vile raging diatribes. Do the Echo not realise that she must put normal people off from commenting on here? Come on Echo.. Please do something to put this tortured rabid animal out of her (and our) misery.. Block her IP

It's well over due that the Echo barred Gandy from this site, preferably blocking her IP address. She ruins just about every thread with her vile raging diatribes.
Do the Echo not realise that she must put normal people off from commenting on here?
Come on Echo.. Please do something to put this tortured rabid animal out of her (and our) misery.. Block her IPwonga

It's well over due that the Echo barred Gandy from this site, preferably blocking her IP address. She ruins just about every thread with her vile raging diatribes. Do the Echo not realise that she must put normal people off from commenting on here? Come on Echo.. Please do something to put this tortured rabid animal out of her (and our) misery.. Block her IP

Score: 6

jxr says...2:59pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story.
Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.jxr

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

You make your point then you criticise the travellers. Do you not realise you are tarring yourself with your freshly prepared brush?

[quote][p][bold]Ghallo[/bold] wrote:
Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).[/p][/quote]You make your point then you criticise the travellers. Do you not realise you are tarring yourself with your freshly prepared brush?Devils Advocate

Ghallo wrote…

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

You make your point then you criticise the travellers. Do you not realise you are tarring yourself with your freshly prepared brush?

Score: 3

Devils Advocate says...6:34pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Howard Cháse wrote…

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.

Do you own or work for a solar panel company? I'm being a little frivilous there, I think you are actually spot on. Just a little concerned that it has been stated that they will never pay back the initial cost. Years ago, when I worked for the C.E.G.B. we were working on energy recovery systems. Sadly, the instability of the plant we were recovering energy from made them cost ineffective. With all the dark days ahead, are you sure these will be worth the effort?

[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote:
Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.[/p][/quote]Do you own or work for a solar panel company?
I'm being a little frivilous there, I think you are actually spot on. Just a little concerned that it has been stated that they will never pay back the initial cost. Years ago, when I worked for the C.E.G.B. we were working on energy recovery systems. Sadly, the instability of the plant we were recovering energy from made them cost ineffective. With all the dark days ahead, are you sure these will be worth the effort?Devils Advocate

Howard Cháse wrote…

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.

Do you own or work for a solar panel company? I'm being a little frivilous there, I think you are actually spot on. Just a little concerned that it has been stated that they will never pay back the initial cost. Years ago, when I worked for the C.E.G.B. we were working on energy recovery systems. Sadly, the instability of the plant we were recovering energy from made them cost ineffective. With all the dark days ahead, are you sure these will be worth the effort?

Score: 0

ThisYear says...6:45pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Ghallo wrote…

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

Is there any comments asking people to be "sorry for the travellers"? Perhaps you have been reading a different thread than the one you posted on. Im sure many people have opinions of those who pick the welfare of animals over the welfare of people. Would you rather washing facilities in the swimming pool be for dogs rather than humans? Your post doesn't really explain what you prefer in the way of that.

[quote][p][bold]Ghallo[/bold] wrote:
Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).[/p][/quote]Is there any comments asking people to be "sorry for the travellers"?
Perhaps you have been reading a different thread than the one you posted on.
Im sure many people have opinions of those who pick the welfare of animals over the welfare of people.
Would you rather washing facilities in the swimming pool be for dogs rather than humans? Your post doesn't really explain what you prefer in the way of that.ThisYear

Ghallo wrote…

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).

Is there any comments asking people to be "sorry for the travellers"? Perhaps you have been reading a different thread than the one you posted on. Im sure many people have opinions of those who pick the welfare of animals over the welfare of people. Would you rather washing facilities in the swimming pool be for dogs rather than humans? Your post doesn't really explain what you prefer in the way of that.

Score: -4

ThisYear says...6:47pm Fri 6 Jun 14

jxr wrote…

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.

There is a subtext to the story of how a 'dogs home' was allowed on undisputed greenbelt land while disputed greenbelt land was denied as a home to human beings.. The fact that "80%+" of the comments is as you say suggest the subtext is relevant to the issue.

[quote][p][bold]jxr[/bold] wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story.
Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.[/p][/quote]There is a subtext to the story of how a 'dogs home' was allowed on undisputed greenbelt land while disputed greenbelt land was denied as a home to human beings..
The fact that "80%+" of the comments is as you say suggest the subtext is relevant to the issue.ThisYear

jxr wrote…

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.

There is a subtext to the story of how a 'dogs home' was allowed on undisputed greenbelt land while disputed greenbelt land was denied as a home to human beings.. The fact that "80%+" of the comments is as you say suggest the subtext is relevant to the issue.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here